Increased risk of oropharyngeal cancers mediated by oral human papillomavirus infection: Results from a Canadian study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to estimate the extent to which oral sex behavior is associated with an increased risk of oropharyngeal cancers (OPCs), and how much of the association is mediated by oral human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. METHODS: We used data from a hospital-based case-control study conducted in Montreal, Canada. Information on oral sex behaviors was collected. Oral rinse and oral brush specimens were analyzed for HPV positivity and genotyping. Logistic regression estimated the odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between oral sex behaviors and OPC. RESULTS: Onset of oral sex practice at age 16 years or younger had an increased risk of OPCs relative to those with onset after age 30 years (OR = 2.98; 95% CI 1.37-6.47). This association decreased (OR = 1.09; 95% CI 0.25-4.71) when restricted to those positive for HPV. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the association between oral sex and OPC seems mediated by oral HPV infection.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".